|
The Lake News Online
  • Lake Sun E-Board: Nixon vetoes gun legislation

  • QUESTION: Gov. Jay Nixon vetoed legislation Friday that would have made it a crime for federal agents to attempt to enforce federal gun laws in Missouri and could have landed journalists in jail for publishing the names of gun owners in the state. He said it infringed on the First Amendment rights of free speech and press. What do you think of the governor's decision?
    • email print
  • QUESTION: Gov. Jay Nixon vetoed legislation Friday that would have made it a crime for federal agents to attempt to enforce federal gun laws in Missouri and could have landed journalists in jail for publishing the names of gun owners in the state. He said it infringed on the First Amendment rights of free speech and press. What do you think of the governor's decision?
    Can’t pick and choose which laws to enforce
    Gov. Nixon made the correct call by  vetoing this bill.  Our constitution doesn't allow States to pick and chose which federal laws to enforce or ignore.  Our federally elected senators and House of Representatives members  have responsibility to represent Missourians on important gun issues; not our state officials.
    Joe Murray
    Take a stand against  growing federal power
    I think the Governor has chosen a side that will make him look good politically, and actually did little, if anything, to support the State of Missouri, for which he represents.  
    I also think it is time that states take stand against the ever-growing Federal Government and draw lines where the Feds are no longer going to be supported/tolerated.  Apparently, Nixon does not have the spine to do so, especially as he was so keen to be a party to sending personal information to the Feds regarding applicants of CCP.  Perhaps he has forgotten who he represents.
    In regards to the act of journalists publishing the names of gun owners, well that is certainly their right.  But how do they justify this when their right to print something tramples people’s right to privacy?  I would think that privacy trumps journalism, but that’s a common sense call.   If there was a justifiable benefit to printing this information, well, maybe one could debate the legitimacy.
    In printing information of this nature, I would assume that they will take full responsibility for any subsequent crimes that occur as a result?  I, frankly, am tired of the so-called ‘freedom of the press’ to invade people’s private lives.  I think the paparazzi should all be jailed for invasion of privacy.  As far as journalist printing the names of lawful gun owners, in my opinion, that is a malicious act and should be treated thusly.
    There used to be something called ‘common sense’.  I’ve noted that it is a rapidly diminishing characteristic in virtually everyone I meet.  This applies especially to politicians and journalists.  While journalists have the ‘right’ to print whatever they want; they should also be held accountable for the subsequent results, good or bad.  
    Page 2 of 2 -  
    Scott Hagan
    Lake Ozark
    Legislation was only a statement
    All Gov. Nixon did was support the U.S. Constitution. Isn't that what the Republicans have wanted all along? I think those who supported the legislation knew it was unenforcable; they only wanted to make a statement.
    Joyce Everhart Hoff
    Gravois Mills
    Legislation would have only created problems
    Governor Nixon did the right thing. The legislation in question is clearly unconstitutional. The only result from allowing this stupid law to stand would be more costly litigation if the Missouri Courts didn't throw it out first.
    Francis Carr
    Sunrise Beach

        • »  EVENTS CALENDAR